Senate-House conference disappoints on Iraq bill

Why is a Democratically controlled congress sending Bush a blank check to continue this war when a majority of Americans want to start getting out of there? Meteor Blades on Kos:

It would be hard to find a progressive who had a good Tuesday as far as Iraq is concerned. The Senate-House conference committee put together an ugly compromise that would give Mister Bush tens of billions of dollars to continue the catastrophe in Iraq. Call it what you will - a blank check, a sell-out, a surrender - it ultimately amounts to failure, unless victory is defined as getting a signable bill on the President's desk regardless of its contents.

Compromise is when two sides each give up something they want in order to get something they want in return. But from this compromise among themselves, what exactly is it that the Democrats will be getting in return from the White House?

Nothing. Because the President refuses to compromise.

Clearly, some people need to primaried. This is a disgrace. We still have a chance to correct this: now that it's out of the conference committee, the bill goes back to each chamber to be voted on. I urge my representative, Barbara Lee, and my Senators, Boxer and Feinstein, to vote NO on this bill. (I also want to thank them for voting YES on McGovern and Feingold-Reid, the bills/amendments that would have redeployed us out of there.)

Speaker Pelosi has said she will vote against this bill. The progressive movement clearly has a lot of fighting left to do to drag the Democratic party to where the American people already are. That's what galls me about this: no one is asking Congress to do something right, but unpopular. We're asking Congress to do something right and very popular. Why are things so broken that this is so hard?